Abstract:
Este fue un estudio comparativo prospectivo de 104 pacientes con cáncer de seno, a quienes se ofreció la elección entre dos tratamientos quirúrgicos conservadores: cuadrantectomía con mastopexia tipo donut (Grupo CMD, n=39) o cuadrantectomía estándar (Grupo CE, n=75). Los grupos fueron similares en tama o radiológico del tumor, localización del tumor en el seno, tama o histológico, y la distribución por estadios pT. En el grupo CMD, la incisión de piel fue tres veces más grande que en el grupo CE, pero con ella se obtuvo al final, una cicatriz alrededor del complejo areola-pezón, sin complicaciones posoperatorias posteriores. El volumen promedio del espécimen quirúrgico y los márgenes de sección, fueron mayores en el grupo CMD comparados con el grupo CE. Se obtuvieron márgenes libres de tumor con mayor frecuencia en el grupo CMD que en el grupo CE, pero la diferencia no fue significativa. Estos datos indican fuertemente que la técnica CMD puede ser más eficiente que la técnica CE, en términos de precisión en la resección del tejido mamario. This is a prospective comparative study comprising 104 patients with breast cancer to which two modalities of conservative therapy were offered: quadrantectomy with mastopexy doughnut type (group QMD, n = 39) or standard quadrantectomy (group QS, n = 75). The two groups had similar tumor size, location of the tumor, histology size and PT distribution. In the QMD group the skin incision was three times greater than in the QS group, but a good healing around the areola-nipple complex was achieved without postoperative complications. Both the size of the surgical specimen and the free margins were greater in the QMD group. Free section margins were more frequently achieved in the QMD group, but the difference was not significant. Our date strongly indicate that the QMD technique can be more efficient that the QS in terms of precision of mammary tissue resection.

Abstract:
this is a prospective comparative study comprising 104 patients with breast cancer to which two modalities of conservative therapy were offered: quadrantectomy with mastopexy doughnut type (group qmd, n = 39) or standard quadrantectomy (group qs, n = 75). the two groups had similar tumor size, location of the tumor, histology size and pt distribution. in the qmd group the skin incision was three times greater than in the qs group, but a good healing around the areola-nipple complex was achieved without postoperative complications. both the size of the surgical specimen and the free margins were greater in the qmd group. free section margins were more frequently achieved in the qmd group, but the difference was not significant. our date strongly indicate that the qmd technique can be more efficient that the qs in terms of precision of mammary tissue resection.

It briefly recalls the theory of Bell’s inequality and some experimental
measures. Then measurements are processed on one hand according to a property
of the wave function, on the other hand according to the sum definition. The
results of such processed measures are apparently not the same, so Bell’s
inequality would not be violated. It is a use of the wave function which
implies the violation of the inequality, as it can be seen on the last
flowcharts.

Abstract:
The traditional thermodynamic theory explains
the reversible phenomena quite well, except that reversible phenomena are rare
or even impossible in practice. Here the purpose is to propose an explanation
valid for reversible and also irreversible phenomena, irreversibility being
common or realistic. It previously exposed points tricky to grasp, as the sign
of the work exchange, the adiabatic expansion in vacuum (free expansion) or the
transfer of heat between two bodies at the same temperature (isothermal
transfer). After having slightly modified the concepts of heat transfer (each
body produces heat according to its own temperature) and work (distinguishing
external pressure from internal pressure), the previous points are more easily
explained. At last, an engine efficiency in case of irreversible transfer is
proposed. This paper is focused on the form of thermodynamics, on “explanations”;
it does not question on “results” (except the irreversible free expansion of
1845...) which remain unchanged.

Abstract:
For a century, hypothesis of a variable time is laid down by the
Relativity Theory. This hypothesis can explain many Nature observations,
experiments and formulas, for example the Lorentz factor demonstration. Because
of such good explanations, the hypothesis of a variable time has been
validated. Nevertheless, it remains some paradoxes and some predictions which
are difficult to measure, as a reversible time or the time variation itself.
The purpose of this article is to study another hypothesis. If it gives interesting
results, it would mean that this alternative hypothesis can also be validated.
The idea in this paper is to replace the variable time by a variable inertial
mass. To the difference with the Theory of Relativity (where the inertial mass
and the gravitational mass are equal and variable), the gravitational mass is here
supposed to be constant. So, starting from the definition of the kinetic
energy, it is introduced the Lorentz factor. And then it is demonstrated the
value of the Lorentz factor thanks to a variable inertial mass. This variable
inertial mass can also explain experiments, like Bertozzi experiment. If this
alternative demonstration was validated, it could help to open doors, other
physical effects could be explained like the addition of velocities.

Abstract:
Is it possible to demonstrate the velocity
addition without using a variable time (as it is done in theory of relativity)?
The topic of this paper is to propose and demonstrate an alternative
expres-sion based on the conservation of linear momenta. The method proposed
here is to start from a physical object (and not from a mathematical point),
i.e. from an object with a mass. And the hy-pothesis is inertial mass to be
different from gravitational mass. Then, when impulses are added, we get an
expression of the velocity addition itself. When numerical predictions are
compared with experimental results, the differences are lower than the measures
uncertainty. And these numerical results are much close to those predicts by
the theory of relativity, nevertheless with a little difference at high
velocities. If this demonstration and this expression were validated, it would
allow giving an alternative explanation to some experiments and nature
observations as Doppler Effect on light celerity. But first, it would be
necessary to get from laboratories more precise experimental results, in order
to validate or not this hypothesis of the sum of linear momenta with a Variable
Inertial Mass.

Abstract:
Quantum Mechanics formalism remains difficult to understand and sometimes is confusing, especially in the explanation of ERP paradox and of Bell’s inequalities with entanglement photons. So a chart of conversion, in which elements are named differently, is proposed. Next, experiment about Bell’s inequalities violation is described in another way, and we hope a clearer one. Main result is Bell’s inequalities would not be violated! The explanation would come from confusion between the definition of the correlation function S1, and a property S2. And consequently, Einstein, Podolski and Rosen would be right on the local “hidden” variable.

Abstract:
Entropy function is used to demonstrate the Carnot efficiency, even if it is not always easy to understand its bases: the reversible movement or the reversible heat transfer. Here, it is proposed to demonstrate the Carnot efficiency “without” using the Entropy function. For this, it is necessary to enhance two concepts: heat transfer based on the source temperature and work transfer based on external pressure. This is achieved through 1) a balance exchanged heat, based on the source temperature and the system temperature, and 2) a balance exchanged work, based on the external pressure and the internal pressure. With these enhanced concepts, Laplace function and Carnot efficiency can be demonstrated without using the Entropy function (S). This is only a new formalism. Usual thermodynamics results are not changed. This new formalism can help to get a better description of realistic phenomena, like the efficiency of a realistic cycle.

Abstract:
Newton’s theory of gravitation has been outdated by relativity theory explaining specific phenomena like perihelion precession of Mercury, light deflection and very recently the detection of gravitational waves. But the disappearance of the obvious gravitational force and the variation of time are arguable concepts difficult to directly prove. Present methodology is based on hypotheses as expressed in a previous article: a universal time and an inertial mass variable according to the Lorentz factor (which could not be envisioned at Newton’s age). Because this methodology is mainly stood on Newtonian mechanics, it will be called neo-Newtonian mechanics. This theory is in coherence with the time of the Quantum Mechanics. In Newtonian mechanics, all forces, including gravitational force, are deducted from the linear momentum. Introducing the variable inertial mass, the result of the demonstration is an updated expression of the net force at high velocity: F = γ^{3}m_{g}a. If such a factor in γ^{3} can look a bit strange at first sight for a force, let us remind that the lost energy in a synchrotron is already measured in γ^{4}. Next article will be on the perihelion precession of Mercury within neo-Newtonian mechanics.

Abstract:
The theory of Relativity is consistent with the Lorentz transformation. Thus Pr. Lévy proposed a simple derivation of it, based on the Relativity postulates. A reply is provided: Some related results (five ones) are found and developed step by step which would invalid it. So Lorentz transformation would not be simply derived by this way. Finally an alternative demonstration of Lorentz transformation is reminded, consistent with Quantum Mechanics.